Where are the Great Women? A feminist analysis of Australian political biographies

Blair Williams
{"title":"Where are the Great Women? A feminist analysis of Australian political biographies","authors":"Blair Williams","doi":"10.22459/ajbh.05.2021.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As women have become more visible in the Australian political sphere, the volume of writing about their lives, careers and experiences has also increased. This has brought to light certain challenges and shortcomings, as well as enduring discursive biases in the existing literature. Political history, for example, and especially political biography, has generally ‘privileged the political activities of men and masculine political institutions’, telling the stories of so-called Great Men while excluding those who do not traditionally belong to this cohort.1 Any attempt to summarise the current state of biographies written on Australian political women and to assess the extent to which these can be improved must therefore address several overlapping lines of inquiry, the four most fundamental of which have been chosen for discussion in this article. First, I will provide an overview of the institutional and discursive masculine biases of political biographies in general. Second, I will outline the state of biographies written on women politicians, noting the lack of such texts and an increasing turn towards autobiography. Third, I compare two recent biographies on women politicians—Anna Broinowski’s Please Explain (2017) and Margaret Simons’s Penny Wong (2019)—to demonstrate how a tendency towards excessive personalisation can become problematic. Lastly, by exploring feminist approaches to political biography, I provide a working definition of feminist political biography and propose a list of ‘dos and don’ts’ for those political biographers who seek to develop a more inclusive model.","PeriodicalId":143131,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Biography and History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Biography and History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22459/ajbh.05.2021.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As women have become more visible in the Australian political sphere, the volume of writing about their lives, careers and experiences has also increased. This has brought to light certain challenges and shortcomings, as well as enduring discursive biases in the existing literature. Political history, for example, and especially political biography, has generally ‘privileged the political activities of men and masculine political institutions’, telling the stories of so-called Great Men while excluding those who do not traditionally belong to this cohort.1 Any attempt to summarise the current state of biographies written on Australian political women and to assess the extent to which these can be improved must therefore address several overlapping lines of inquiry, the four most fundamental of which have been chosen for discussion in this article. First, I will provide an overview of the institutional and discursive masculine biases of political biographies in general. Second, I will outline the state of biographies written on women politicians, noting the lack of such texts and an increasing turn towards autobiography. Third, I compare two recent biographies on women politicians—Anna Broinowski’s Please Explain (2017) and Margaret Simons’s Penny Wong (2019)—to demonstrate how a tendency towards excessive personalisation can become problematic. Lastly, by exploring feminist approaches to political biography, I provide a working definition of feminist political biography and propose a list of ‘dos and don’ts’ for those political biographers who seek to develop a more inclusive model.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伟大的女人在哪里?对澳大利亚政治传记的女权主义分析
随着女性在澳大利亚政治领域的影响力越来越大,有关她们的生活、事业和经历的文章也越来越多。这揭示了某些挑战和缺点,以及现有文献中持久的话语偏见。例如,政治史,尤其是政治传记,通常“优先考虑男性的政治活动和男性化的政治机构”,讲述所谓伟人的故事,而将那些传统上不属于这一群体的人排除在外因此,任何试图总结澳大利亚政治女性传记的现状并评估这些传记可以改进的程度的尝试都必须解决几个重叠的调查线,本文选择了其中四个最基本的来讨论。首先,我将概述政治传记的制度性和话语性男性偏见。其次,我将概述女性政治家传记的现状,指出此类文本的缺乏以及越来越多地转向自传。第三,我比较了最近两部关于女性政治家的传记——安娜·布洛诺斯基的《请解释》(2017)和玛格丽特·西蒙斯的《黄佩妮》(2019)——以证明过度个性化的倾向是如何产生问题的。最后,通过探索女性主义政治传记的方法,我提供了一个女性主义政治传记的工作定义,并为那些寻求发展更具包容性模式的政治传记作者提出了一份“做与不做”的清单。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Patrick White and the path to Sarsaparilla: How a great novelist became a great unread Autobiography as publicity: The case of Jenny Howard Sport, race and African-Caribbean migrants in Australia: Evaluating Jack Dowridge, the ‘Black Diamond’ boxer Beyond the red shoe: Searching for Mrs Petrov Beyond the limits: Australian anti‑communism and the unforgiving 1950s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1